Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is a point I meant to bring up earlier. The Sierra Nevada are more rugged. The Rockies (especially in Colorado) may be tall but they are pretty tame.
Why don't you summit Maroon Bells and then say the Rockies are tame
I kid...but generally you're right, in much of the state the Rockies are more tame, especially compared to some of those pics of the Sierra Nevadas (which are blowing my mind, never knew how beautiful they were) Although not all are as rounded as that pic of Mt. Elbert, which is one of the easiest (and lamest) fourteeners to climb.
Notable exceptions are the Elks (Maroon Bells) and the San Juans (SW Colo.). Both are pretty rugged.
I remember visiting Yosemite as a kid, but I definitely need to go again. Keep the pics of SN coming!
Both ranges are beautiful, but I don't think the Sierra Nevada has any edge over the rockies in terms of diversity. The east side of the Sierra Nevada have an incredible vertical relief that is unmatched by any other mountain range in the US. They are beautiful!
However the Rockies are definitely not dwarfed by the Sierra Nevada, and in terms of eco systems I think its a tie between the two. Anyone who claims that the Rockies have no steep or challenging peaks to climb obviously has never been outside the Denver/front range area. The Crestones in southern Colorado are incredibly steep and rocky, as are the San Juan Mountains in the South west part of CO particularily Mount Wilson. The Maroon Bells in the Elk mountains are one of the most challenging climbs in the US. Capitol Peak is challenging too.
The Sierra Nevada is definitely a range that has very challenging climbs/hikes but it's not the only range of it's kind in this category.
Mount Elbert is a pretty boring and "easy" mountain to climb, but there are so many others that are a force to be rekoned with in CO. Mount Whitney in the Sierra Nevada is an incredible peak but is also not a very challenging climb when compared to other peaks in both states.
Overall I'd pick the Rockies, but I love the Sierras and am heading back soon to try Mount Williamson!
Here are a few pictures of the CO mountains I mentioned
'
I actually agree. The Cascades and Olympic ranges in Washington State are much more dramatic than the Rockies or Sierras because they have a greater vertical relief. Plus they are glaciated which makes a big difference. The Rockies in the United States are not as glaciated. Neither are the Sierras. The Canadian Rockies are amazing.
I think the Sierras are pretty impressive though.
Actually the Olympic Mountains do not have a greater vertical relief than the Rockies or Sierra Nevada. The highest peak Mount Olympus is just under 8,000 feet ASL. There are peaks in the Sierra Nevada that reach 10,000 feet plus above the ground in a much shorter horizontal distance.
There are also peaks in the Rockies such as Pikes Peak, and Mount Sneffels, and others that reach 7,500 to 8,200 feet above the ground.
The cascades are also not any higher above the ground overall, it's the massive volcanoes in the cascades such as Mount Rainier and Mount Adams that have such an incredible vertical relief, but these make up only a fraction of the range.
The Canadian Rockies also are steeper but not any higher above the ground than the Rockies or Sierra Nevada. Mount Robson and a few others are an exception to this in the Canadian Rockies.
I agree that the Olympics, Cascades, and Canadian Rockies are beautiful, but they do not have more vertical relief as a range than the Sierras or Colorado Rockies. They are much steeper overall though and have glaciated summits, which makes them so Beautiful!
'
I actually agree. The Cascades and Olympic ranges in Washington State are much more dramatic than the Rockies or Sierras because they have a greater vertical relief. Plus they are glaciated which makes a big difference. The Rockies in the United States are not as glaciated. Neither are the Sierras. The Canadian Rockies are amazing.
I think the Sierras are pretty impressive though.
I like the Sierras best, if youve ever flown over the west coast at 37k feet when you see that range it is unbeleivable how fast it rises up. Colorado rockies go on and on and on....not that dramatic after a while just more mountain road turns and another peak to see. Olympics would be second, Tetons third, Sangre De Cristo's in NM fourth then Colorado.
I agree that the Olympics, Cascades, and Canadian Rockies are beautiful, but they do not have more vertical relief as a range than the Sierras or Colorado Rockies.
When it comes to visually stunning, the Cascades and the Olympics blow most of the Rockies away. Simply because of their visibility. Due in part to the vertical rise. Understand that vertical rise over water is 100%. I suggest to you that the mountains on both sides (Cascades to the east, Olympics to the west, are far more dramatic from the major metropolitan areas in Western WA, than are the Rockies.
When it comes to visually stunning, the Cascades and the Olympics blow most of the Rockies away. Simply because of their visibility. Due in part to the vertical rise. Understand that vertical rise over water is 100%. I suggest to you that the mountains on both sides (Cascades to the east, Olympics to the west, are far more dramatic from the major metropolitan areas in Western WA, than are the Rockies.
You can see mountains perfectly fine from many cities up against the rockies, and they still look massive.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.